Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorPrange-Lasonder, Gerdienke B.
dc.contributor.authorAlt Murphy, Margit
dc.contributor.authorLamers, Ilse
dc.contributor.authorHughes, Ann-Marie
dc.contributor.authorBuurke, Jaap H.
dc.contributor.authorFeys, Peter
dc.contributor.authorKeller, Thierry
dc.contributor.authorKlamroth-Marganska, Verena
dc.contributor.authorTarkka, Ina M.
dc.contributor.authorTimmermans, Annick
dc.contributor.authorBurridge, Jane H.
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-20T12:08:55Z
dc.date.available2021-12-20T12:08:55Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationPrange-Lasonder, G. B., Alt Murphy, M., Lamers, I., Hughes, A.-M., Buurke, J. H., Feys, P., Keller, T., Klamroth-Marganska, V., Tarkka, I. M., Timmermans, A., & Burridge, J. H. (2021). European evidence-based recommendations for clinical assessment of upper limb in neurorehabilitation (CAULIN) : data synthesis from systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus. <i>Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation</i>, <i>18</i>, Article 162. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00951-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00951-y</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_102919686
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/79044
dc.description.abstractBackground: Technology-supported rehabilitation can help alleviate the increasing need for cost-effective rehabilitation of neurological conditions, but use in clinical practice remains limited. Agreement on a core set of reliable, valid and accessible outcome measures to assess rehabilitation outcomes is needed to generate strong evidence about effectiveness of rehabilitation approaches, including technologies. This paper collates and synthesizes a core set from multiple sources; combining existing evidence, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus into European recommendations for Clinical Assessment of Upper Limb In Neurorehabilitation (CAULIN). Methods: Data from systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus (Delphi methodology) were systematically extracted and synthesized using strength of evidence rating criteria, in addition to recommendations on assessment procedures. Three sets were defined: a core set: strong evidence for validity, reliability, responsiveness and clinical utility AND recommended by at least two sources; an extended set: strong evidence OR recommended by at least two sources and a supplementary set: some evidence OR recommended by at least one of the sources. Results: In total, 12 measures (with primary focus on stroke) were included, encompassing body function and activity level of the International Classification of Functioning and Health. The core set recommended for clinical practice and research: Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT); the extended set recommended for clinical practice and/or clinical research: kinematic measures, Box and Block Test (BBT), Chedoke Arm Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI), Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT) and ABILHAND; the supplementary set recommended for research or specific occasions: Motricity Index (MI); Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment (CMSA), Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment Movement (STREAM), Frenchay Arm Test (FAT), Motor Assessment Scale (MAS) and body-worn movement sensors. Assessments should be conducted at pre-defined regular intervals by trained personnel. Global measures should be applied within 24 h of hospital admission and upper limb specific measures within 1 week. Conclusions: The CAULIN recommendations for outcome measures and assessment procedures provide a clear, simple, evidence-based three-level structure for upper limb assessment in neurological rehabilitation. Widespread adoption and sustained use will improve quality of clinical practice and facilitate meta-analysis, critical for the advancement of technology-supported neurorehabilitation.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherBiomed Central
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.subject.otherassessment
dc.subject.othermultiple sclerosis
dc.subject.otheroutcome measures
dc.subject.otherrehabilitation
dc.subject.otherspinal cord injury
dc.subject.otherstroke
dc.subject.othertherapy
dc.subject.othertraumatic brain injury
dc.subject.otherupper extremity
dc.subject.otherupper limb
dc.titleEuropean evidence-based recommendations for clinical assessment of upper limb in neurorehabilitation (CAULIN) : data synthesis from systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202112206027
dc.contributor.laitosLiikuntatieteellinen tiedekuntafi
dc.contributor.laitosFaculty of Sport and Health Sciencesen
dc.contributor.oppiaineLiikuntalääketiedefi
dc.contributor.oppiaineSports and Exercise Medicineen
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bc
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.relation.issn1743-0003
dc.relation.volume18
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© 2021 the Authors
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.subject.ysolääkinnällinen kuntoutus
dc.subject.ysohermoston taudit
dc.subject.ysoMS-tauti
dc.subject.ysoselkäydinvammat
dc.subject.ysokäsivarret
dc.subject.ysoaivovammat
dc.subject.ysoaivohalvaus
dc.subject.ysokädet
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20475
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p295
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p4226
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p29389
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p38345
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p12478
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p6354
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p810
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.relation.doi10.1186/s12984-021-00951-y
jyx.fundinginformationThe European Network on Robotics for NeuroRehabilitation (Working Group 1) developed these recommendations. Their work was funded by the European Co-Operation in Science and Technology (COST Action TD1006) programme. The funding body had no role in or infuence on the selected approach and synthesis, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.
dc.type.okmA2


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

CC BY 4.0
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on CC BY 4.0